From: john matijevic (matijevi@bellsouth.net)
Date: Mon Aug 30 2004 - 23:06:36 GMT-3
Hello Cisco Nuts,
No offense taken, This is why I interpret you to say this book is
useless.
My
>only problem and the only reason why I ask these questions is: This
book
>was written by a Lab Proctor (still a valid proctor, I think)....If he
>has this kind of solutions, then with what I have learnt so far is
>pretty much useless....
Again no worries I am only here to help. Please let me know if you have
any other questions, and please feel free to use the forum on my
website.
And the book is written by a valid Proctor.
Sincerely,
John Matijevic, CCIE #13254, MCSE, CNE, CCEA
CEO
IgorTek Inc.
151 Crandon Blvd. #402
Key Biscayne, FL 33149
Hablo Espanol
305-321-6232
http://home.bellsouth.net/p/PWP-CCIE
-----Original Message-----
From: Cisco Nuts [mailto:cisconuts@hotmail.com]
Sent: Monday, August 30, 2004 9:24 PM
To: matijevi@bellsouth.net; ccielab@groupstudy.com
Cc: cisco@groupstudy.com
Subject: RE: Cisco Press R&S Lab workbook - Clarification needed - ???
John!!
A million apologies.....!!
Nowhere have I said that this book is useless .... :-)
My post said Clarification - that's it !!
All I wanted is clarification - if I do this will my points get deducted
and same for if I don't do this.
Have done most if not all the InternetworkExpert Labs and having gone
thru the Brian's training, I was only trying to get my self prepared for
the actual Lab....
Anyone else's comments - please feel free?
Anyone concur - especially the ones from InetExp's forums - ??
Sincerely.
>From: "john matijevic" <matijevi@bellsouth.net>
>To: "'Cisco Nuts'" <cisconuts@hotmail.com>,<ccielab@groupstudy.com>
>CC: <cisco@groupstudy.com>
>Subject: RE: Cisco Press R&S Lab workbook - Clarification needed - ???
>Date: Mon, 30 Aug 2004 21:11:23 -0400
>
>Hello Cisconuts,
>I am sorry that you feel that this book is useless, I have spoken with
>many people that have done the labs including myself and they actually
>have very good regards for the book including those that work for
Cisco.
>From what I gather I am not sure if you are taking the time to actually
>do the lab or are just reading it looking for mistakes. Some of the
>questions that you ask are explained in the solution details. I think
>you are focusing to much on the erros and not enough on the positives.
>Again this book is written by a CCIE proctor, I think it is a wonderful
>resource. I am happy to answer your questions as I have done all the
>labs myself and got all the labs to successfully work as per the answer
>key and their verification. I also have a solution forum that you can
>discuss. Here are the responses to your questions as far:
>
>a. why is the loopback
>intf. configured as point-to-point? Nowhere is there a requirement to
>see
>them as a /24 anywhere?? Have they asked us ??
>
>Answer:
>how is configuring a ip ospf network point-to-point a mistake? It
>basically instead of the route appearing as a host route, it appears as
>a network /24 in this case. It can prevent issues further on from
>happening. Again I had to go to expensive bootcamp to learn this
lesson.
>
>
>b. why does the serial
>intf. have ip ospf network point-to-point and point-to-multipoint
>configured (ex. on R2) Nowhere have they asked us to do that? I feel
>they
>should be left as default network type and get that to work.(using the
>neighbor cmd. and ip os prio 255 on the hub)
> as 1.1, as far as the lab goes it says in the beginning that you are
>permitted to use subinterfaces on R2 interface s0/1.
>
>Answer:
>It does not say you have to use subinterface on R2, it just says you
are
>permitted. It only says that DO Not configure subinterfaces on any
other
>routers. The serial interface of R2 has a point-to-point and a
>multipoint, if you look at the topology, there is a point-to-point
>network from r2 and r3, R2 has a multipoint to R5, R1 and R4. So to me
>this makes logically sense to have a point-to-multipoint. And this is
>with 2 interfaces, there is not a ip ospf network point-to-point and ip
>ospf network point-to-multipoint on the same interface. Again these are
>2 separate serial interfaces and if you look at the diagram it makes
>sense.
>
>
>c. Why is the Bri0/0 on R3
>configured as no peer neighbor-route?
>What other mistakes do you see on Section 2.1?
>
>
>Answer:
>The no peer neighbor route is configured because as you know it will
>prevent a host route from appearing in the routing table and causing
>issues. So I am not sure how you see it as an error in the book.
>
>
> Why is only virtual-link configured b/w R3 and R2? Why not b/w R3 and
>R5? If the FR b/w R3 and R2 goes down, how will vlan33 on R3 get to
area
>0 on R5??
>
>Answer:
>
>I am pretty sure this question was answered before basically the lab
did
>not ask for redundancy. So that is why you don't see 2 virtual-links.
>
>Section 2.3 asks us to configure Rip only on e0/0 of R4 but the
>solution does not have the passive-interface default command and a no
>passive-interface e0/0 on R4? If this is not needed on R4 then why in
>the
>preceding section for Eigrp regarding the same type of question, the
>passive-intf. cmd. is used?
>
>Answer:
>R4 ethernet interface is network 140.200.0.0/16 the other interfaces
>loopback and serial are on 160.10.0.0/16 network. So it is not
necessary
>to put a passive interface and a no passive on Ethernet 0, just include
>that 140.200.10.0 network in the rip process. As far as the eigrp
>process, you could use the passive interface default command with the
no
>pass because there are other interfaces in the 160.10.0.0/24 network.
>You could have also just put the interface in the routing process for
>example, network 160.10.33.0 0.0.0.255. As long as it doesn't restrict
>you from doing so.
>
>If you have further questions please don't hesitate to call me to
>discuss. Also if you need rack time I am willing to give out my rack
for
>FREE!!! And don't forget the forum area, I also encourage you to sign
up
>as a member.
>
>
>Sincerely,
>John Matijevic, CCIE #13254, MCSE, CNE, CCEA
>CEO
>IgorTek Inc.
>151 Crandon Blvd. #402
>Key Biscayne, FL 33149
>Hablo Espanol
>305-321-6232
>http://home.bellsouth.net/p/PWP-CCIE
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf Of
>Cisco Nuts
>Sent: Monday, August 30, 2004 8:21 PM
>To: ccielab@groupstudy.com
>Cc: cisco@groupstudy.com
>Subject: Cisco Press R&S Lab workbook - Clarification needed - ???
>
>Hello,Just finished Lab 4 of the Cisco Press R&S Lab Workbook and had
>some questions: 1. Section 1.1 asks to configure FR on R2,R4,R5 & R1
>and
>says that subinterfaces are permitted on R2 only I configured
multipoint
>on R2 but the solution uses physical intf. Woudl a mp be valid? 2.
>Section 2.1 asks to configure loopbacks as part of Ospf. And also other
>Ospf tasks and a Virtual link taks requirements. The solution has
>multiple mistakes (If I may have spotted them): a. why is the loopback
>intf. configured as point-to-point? Nowhere is there a requirement to
>see
>them as a /24 anywhere?? Have they asked us ?? b. why does the serial
>intf. have ip ospf network point-to-point and point-to-multipoint
>configured (ex. on R2) Nowhere have they asked us to do that? I feel
>they
>should be left as default network type and get that to work.(using the
>neighbor cmd. and ip os prio 255 on the hub) c. Why is the Bri0/0 on R3
>configured as no peer neighbor-route? They have not asked us to do
this.
>I understand why we would use the command but have they asked us - No
!!
>d. Why is only virtual-link configured b/w R3 and R2? Why not b/w R3
and
>R5? If the FR b/w R3 and R2 goes down, how will vlan33 on R3 get to
area
>0 on R5?? Section 2.3 asks us to configure Rip only on e0/0 of R4 but
>the
>solution does not have the passive-interface default command and a no
>passive-interface e0/0 on R4? If this is not needed on R4 then why in
>the
>preceding section for Eigrp regarding the same type of question, the
>passive-intf. cmd. is used? These are what I have found upto the IGP
>section. I still have to go over the rest of the solutions for Lab 4.
>My
>only problem and the only reason why I ask these questions is: This
book
>was written by a Lab Proctor (still a valid proctor, I think)....If he
>has this kind of solutions, then with what I have learnt so far is
>pretty much useless....I would flunk badly in the Lab. Or is it just an
>overisight by the authors?? Please tell me it is. Thank you.Sincerely.
>
>-----------------------------------------------------------------------
-
>
>On the road to retirement? Check out MSN Life Events for advice on how
>to
>get there!
>
>_______________________________________________________________________
>Please help support GroupStudy by purchasing your study materials from:
>http://shop.groupstudy.com
>
>Subscription information may be found at:
>http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
>
>
_____
Express <http://g.msn.com/8HMAENUS/2731??PS=47575> yourself instantly
with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's FREE!
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Fri Sep 03 2004 - 07:02:50 GMT-3